Il 14 Aprile 2011 alle 12:39 Libia, i Paesi Brics condannano i bombardamenti della Nato | Notizie Più ha scritto:

[...] more: Libia, i Paesi Brics condannano i bombardamenti della Nato Segnala presso: Articoli CorrelatiGheddafi perde i pezzi: fugge a Londra il suo ministro degli [...]

Il 15 Aprile 2011 alle 9:03 fsl ha scritto:

E chi se ne frega?

I paesi del Brics possono dire quello che vogliono, ma anche le loro posizioni sono dettate da biechi motivi di interesse, non diversi da quelli dei paesi che hanno deciso di bombardare.
Vorrei conoscere quale nazione sovrana al mondo lascia influenzare la propria politica estera dagli interessi degli altri.

Il 15 Aprile 2011 alle 9:21 yahuwah ha scritto:

Di certo è che, non aver capito ancora che il famoso “GRUPPO DI CONTATTO”, e sopratutto il famoso “GRUPPO DEI VALOROSI” in combutta con i media menzognosi, i famosi “RIBELLI” (terroristi di Al-Qaeda assieme a qualche imbranato mentale) sono una massa ectoplasmatica di TRUFFATORI & DI CRIMINALI di guerra, è da ipocriti.
Chi abbia visto ieri RAI2, “LA STORIA SIAMO NOI”, se ne sarà accorto di quanto è un atto criminale OCCIDENTALE di quello che sta succedendo in Libia… Stranissimo che in Italia qualcuno “cerchi” di riferire la VERITA’. !!

Leggiamo adesso chi è il CRIMINALE di GUERRA William Hague:

Libya: Where William Hague got it wrong
14.04.2011
William Hague. A conceited, self-opinionated and arrogant wannabe politician so typical of little men with little lives, whose only claim to fame is to have got it so monumentally wrong about Libya and to have sided with terrorists who fought against British troops for Al-Qaeda. Just who the Hell is this freak to say Gaddafi must go?
William Hague, a failed politician fighting his corner in perhaps the most hated government in British history using Libya as an excuse to turn the attention away from the disastrous social policies of his party which ruined his country in the 1980s and early 1990s - reveals himself today as an abject failure as a Foreign Secretary, arguably the worst insult to British and world diplomacy in the annals of history.

Like all little men, William Hague is a protagonist, eternally searching for a front to hide behind, an excuse for his sad little existence and a cover for the extreme unpopularity of his Tory party. And like all protagonists, William Hague has jumped the gun.

Time after time after time, that whiny, tinny little voice on TV, that self-righteous tone of the British northerner-cum-toff (it never quite comes off, does it?), claiming that “Gaddafi” used weapons against innocent civilians, that NATO is there to defend civilians against a “dictator” and that “Gaddafi must go”. Now just who the Hell is this…freak…to say anyone should go, in their own country? What kind of imperialist arrogance is that, coming from this apology for a man?

If anyone should go, it is Hague, the traitor, whose sheer arrogance and unadulterated barefaced lies match the priggishness of their delivery and the pig-headed imperialist orgy they betray. And why? Because the Libya debacle was primed and prepared in (where else?) the USA decades back, failed once, in (where else?) Benghazi in the mid 1990s and now that the oil companies have finally got their foot in Libya, it’s time to go for it before the oil companies could be nationalised.

Colonel Gaddafi never attacked innocent civilians - he is fighting against Al Qaeda terrorists controlled by a criminal who recruited the same Benghazi fanatics to fight against British troops in Iraq and to kill British soldiers in Afghanistan. One wonders whether William Hague, the traitor, would dare to show his featureless face and bald pate in the market town of Wootton Bassett, where the bodies of British servicemen are repatriated after arriving at RAF Lyneham air base.

I invite him to walk around Wootton Bassett with a placard stating “I am supporting the Islamist fundamentalist terrorists from Benghazi, the ones who hate Colonel Gaddafi because he spoke out against stoning women and killing men for being homosexuals, and for calling the Moslem veil a tent, the ones who yell Allahu Akhbar like their British-hating friends in Afghanistan and who were recruited there to fight against our troops”. That is precisely what William Hague is doing and anything he states to the contrary is a pig-faced lie.

Here is their Foreign Secretary, a traitor, lying about a causus belli, failing to see that the Libyan authorities are as hugely popular in most of the country as they have been successful in fighting against the Benghazi terrorists and foreign mercenaries drafted in to cause havoc across the country, now thankfully confined to Misrata and the far East. Here is their Foreign Secretary taking the side of Al Qaeda terrorists and aiding and abetting exactly the same elements who have fought against and killed British troops elsewhere.

William Hague is, in a word, a traitor. While his aircraft carry out missions supporting Islamist terrorists in Libya, wasting up to 50,000 pounds per hour per aircraft, the people of his country tighten their belts. If he had not jumped the gun, the “rebellion” would long ago have been put down in Libya, which would now be living in peace and the traitors who took up arms against the Government would have been liquidated, punished or pardoned.

What he has done is to involve his armed forces in a battle which is already lost, in a fight which is wrong. He has taken the wrong side and painted himself into a corner, his desperate plight now getting other NATO countries to shoulder some of the cost because his darling terrorist rebels are losing the battle.

If anyone should go, it is William Hague, the traitor who supports the sworn enemies of his own people, who supports Al Qaeda terrorists against a sovereign government and who wastes millions of pounds of his taxpayers’ money on taking sides in a battle which has nothing to do with him. Who the Hell is this freak to say Colonel Gaddafi must go. Why? For fighting against Islamist terrorists?

Next time around, maybe William Hague should lock himself in a hotel room with a, er…”special advisor” (third picture) and get some of it out of his system before inflicting himself and his pent-up closeted frustrations on the international community. What is it with these British politicians?

Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey

Pravda.Ru
http://english.pravda.ru/opini.....a_hague-0/

Il 15 Aprile 2011 alle 18:33 anna.one ha scritto:

…e da un punto di vista del counterterrorism, un pericolo più grave è che la guerra civile/stalemate continui senza fine.

UBL si è dimostrato abile nel sfruttare le guerre civili e conflitti, in Afghanistan, Chechnya e Iraq, tra gli altri paesi, al- Qaeda e i suoi spin-off inizialmente hanno lavorato con i combattenti locali per “problemi” locali ma lentamente hanno fatto la lotta più globale, una lotta contro gli US e rendendo la componente jihadist della resistenza più grande. Data la forte rappresentanza libica di Al Qaeda e dei jihadists nel ruolo svolto nella lotta anti-Qaddafi, al Qaeda potrebbe tentare di piegare questo conflitto alla sua volontà. Così la rapida fine di Qaddafi è tanto più necessaria.

Il 9 Maggio 2011 alle 19:27 (Credits: Ansa/Alessandro Di Meo) | Italia in Guerra ? ha scritto:

[...] Libia, i Paesi Brics condannano i bombardamenti della Nato [...]